THE OREGON QUESTION.
"Lost by adventurous Britishman, Won by bold American."

    A brief sketch or resume of the "Oregon question" seems appropriate in a history of any section of the territory included in that discussion. Dr. Barrows calls it the "struggle for possession." No question has ever arisen, perhaps, that came so near precipitating a war between Great Britain and the United States without the actual conflict of arms. It was a question that included all points of international diplomacy and negotiation between the United States and Great Britain regarding title to the Northwest country, and pertained especially to the territory now included in the state of Washington, for the country north of the Columbia river was what Great Britain especially coveted.
    Prior to 1818 the Hudson's Bay Company, a powerful corporation, chartered by the British crown, Charles II, in 1670, invaded the Oregon territory, including what are now the states of Oregon, Washington, Idaho and Montana, with traders, hunters and trappers. Their possessions were fortified with commercial and military establishments. Meanwhile a few persons from the United States found their way into the territory, which led to the discussion as to the ownership of the country. Our great statesmen had very inadequate conceptions of: the value and importance of the territory involved in the discussion. This is evidenced in their expressions.
    The National Intelligencer in the early-forties published these words: "Of all the: countries upon the face of the earth Oregon is one of the least favored by heaven.. It is almost as barren as Sahara, and quite as unhealthy as the Campagna of Italy'' And Senator Dayton, of New Jersey, proceeded to say, "God forbid that the time should ever come when a state on the shores of the Pacific, with its interests and tendencies of trade all looking toward the Asiatic nations of the East, shall add its jarring claims to our already distracted and overburdened confederacy." Evidently the continental idea had not yet reached the senate" 61 these United States.
    Daniel Webster said: "What do we want with this vast worthless area, this region of savages and wild beasts, of deserts, of shifting sands and whirlwinds of dust, of cactus and prairie dogs? To what use could we ever hope to put these great deserts or these great mountain ranges, impenetrable and covered to their base with eternal snow?
    "What can we ever hope to do with the western coast, a coast of three thousand miles, rock-bound, cheerless and uninviting, and not a harbor on it? What use have we for such a country? Mr. President, I will never vote one cent from the public treasury to place the Pacific coast one inch nearer Boston than it is now.”
    Senator Benton said in 1825:
"The ridge of the Rocky mountains may be named as a convenient, natural and everlasting boundary. Along this ridge the western limit of the Republic should be drawn, and the statue of the tallied god Terminus should be erected on its highest peak, never to be thrown down."
    These expressions are not to be wondered at when we realize that nearly all information pertaining to the country had been received through representatives of the Hudson's Bay Company or through persons influenced by them. They had advisedly, for selfish purposes, described it as a "miasmatic wilderness, uninhabitable except by savage beasts and more savage men." This was done in order to prevent the settlement of white people in the country, which they knew would ultimately interfere with their lucrative fur traffic with the aborigines of the land.
   
JOINT OCCUPANCY TREATY.
    Both Great Britain and the United States being apparently unprepared for definite action, in 1818, a treaty of joint occupation was entered into by which "The northwest coast of America westward of the Stony Mountains shall be open to the subjects of the two contracting powers, not to be construed to the prejudice of any claim which either of the high contracting parties may have to any part of said country." This treaty was extended indefinitely in 1827, with the provision that after 1838 either party could abrogate it by giving-the other one year's notice. Under this treaty the Hudson's Bay Company s shrewd representatives exercised every strategy conceivable to prevent immigration from the United States and succeeded to a great extent for some time. But increasing knowledge of the value of the country stimulated the indomitable frontiersmen to move westward. Despite the despicable efforts of the Hudson's Bay Company to arrest wagons, break plowshares, freeze out settlers, and by a system of overland forts and seaport surveillance prevent every step that tended toward the actual occupancy of the country, a sufficient number of Americans had settled before 1844 to force upon the United States the question of title. In the year mentioned Mr. Calhoun, then secretary of state, demanded of the British government a specific statement of its claims to the Oregon territory. Great Britain replied by renewing a claim already made in 1824, namely, "That the boundary line between the possessions of the two countries should be the forty-ninth parallel of north latitude to where it intersects the northeastern branch of the Columbia river, then clown the middle channel of that river to the sea." This claim, if allowed, would have given Great Britain not only British Columbia but also the greater part of the state of Washington. Great Britain based its claim upon the exploration of the Columbia by Vancouver after Gray had discovered it, and upon the occupancy of the country by the Hudson's Bay Company for traffic in furs. The United States rested its claim on Captain Gray's discovery of the Columbia river, on the Louisiana purchase, on the explorations of Lewis and Clarke, tracing the Columbia from its source to its mouth, on the settlement of Astoria, on the treaty with Spain in 1818 and on the treaty with Mexico in 1828. Mr. Calhoun rejected the claim of Great Britain and proposed the forty-ninth parallel from the Rockies to the sea as the division between the two countries. The Democratic convention of 1844 declared for the annexation of Texas and also "that our title to the Oregon territory was clear and unquestionable, and that no part of the same should be ceded to Great Britain." The "shibboleth" of. the Democratic party during that campaign, relative to the Oregon question, was ''fifty-tour forty, or fight." An effort was made to abrogate the treaty of 1827 and it seemed for a time that war between Great Britain and the United States was inevitable. The proposal of the British minister, Mr. Packenham, to submit the question in dispute to arbitration was respectfully declined, and the final result of negotiations was the treaty of 1846, whereby the forty-ninth parallel originally proposed by Mr.- Calhoun was accepted by Great Britain as the boundary between the two countries. Provision was made in this .treaty that when the boundary reached the waters of the Pacific coast it should run down the middle of the channel which separates the continent from Vancouver island, and thence southerly through the same channel and Fuca straits to the sea. No map or chart being attached to the treaty, according to which the line could be drawn, a vexatious controversy arose which came very near involving the two countries in war. The contention related to the location of the middle of the channel which separates the continent from Vancouver island. Great Britain insisted that it was in the Rosaria straits or channel, while the United States contended that it was in the Canal de Haro. Each party adhered to its position through a protracted and vehement correspondence upon the j subject. Between these channels was an area of about four hundred square miles, including several prominent islands comprising land area of about one hundred and seventy square miles which was the bone of contention on the part of both parties. After a prolonged debate of the question, each party determined to have its own way; by the treaty of Washington in 1871 it was agreed that Emperor William of Germany, as arbitrator, should decide which of the two claims was most in accordance with the treaty of 1846. He decided in favor of our claim, thus giving the United States an undisputable claim to the island of San Juan and the other islands around it. Although the Hudson's Bay Company took possession of all the country west of the Rocky mountains and on both sides of the Columbia river, yet Great Britain did not assert possession of that part of the country now constituting the state of Oregon. But it is evident that if the title was good north, it was equally good south of the river. Furthermore, if the title of the United States was good as to what is now Oregon and Washington, why not equally good for all the territory, including British Columbia? Careful and candid students of the situation have contended that the proposition of Calhoun in 1844 to surrender to Great Britain all the territory north of the forty-ninth parallel of north latitude was made in the interest of slavery. The less there was of this territory, the number of free states to be admitted into the Union would be less. If he had not committed our government to such unfortunate, and what some have designated as "disgraceful" offer, it is quite probable that British Columbia would be to-day, what many would deem desirable in view of its growing importance, a part of the United States.

 

Back     Next

©Shauna Williams

---

BACK -- HOME


© Genealogy Trails